The webinar featured a Milliman consultant, a Medicaid managed care health plan director, and the director of Network Solutions at Express Scripts, Andy Becker.

Becker explained Express Scripts' pharmacy network strategy, noting that 15% to 20% of the PBM’s claim volume now goes through a narrow network. He also revealed some previously-undisclosed insights into how Express Scripts outfoxed Walgreens during their 2012 imbroglio.

I highly recommend this webinar to anyone interested in the PBM/pharmacy/patient dynamics behind narrow networks. Excerpts below.
Narrower pharmacy networks—either preferred or limited models—have become an accepted means for payers to seek drug spending savings. Narrow network models encourage or require consumers to use designated pharmacies or channels, instead of allowing consumers to choose from an open network containing almost all pharmacies. These networks now dominate Medicare Part D and are slowly penetrating commercial health plans. For more detailed analysis, see Chapter 8 of 2013–14 Economic Report on Retail, Mail, and Specialty Pharmacies and my Pharmaceutical Executive article Pharmacy Benefit Networks: The Big Squeeze.

National Plus Network, a broad network with about 68,000 nationwide pharmacies

National Network, which excludes Walgreens

Express Advantage Network, a preferred network with only about 32,000 pharmacies

Here's a summary slide from the webinar:

[Click to Enlarge]

In the Express Advantage Network, the consumer retains the option of using any pharmacy in the broader network. However, the consumer’s out-of-pocket expenses are $10 higher at a non-preferred pharmacy. Preferred network pharmacies include Rite Aid, mass merchants (Costco, Kmart, Target, Walmart), and supermarket chains (Albertsons, Giant Eagle, Kroger, Publix, Safeway, Supervalu, Winn Dixie). Non-preferred pharmacy chains include CVS, Walgreens, Medicine Shoppe, and Hy-Vee. (NOTE: These are the preferred and non-preferred pharmacies listed on the AIS webinar slides.)

The webinar also includes a fascinating review of the 2012 Express Scripts-Walgreens dispute, including a review of Express Scripts' major patient communication actions. Becker presents compelling evidence of why consumers didn’t mind losing access to Walgreens:

83% of patients that were using Walgreens had another Express Scripts contracted pharmacy less than one mile away from that particular Walgreens

98% of patients were within three miles of another Express Scripts contracted pharmacy

Only 10% of patients were exclusively using Walgreens pharmacies.

Here’s how Becker describes what happened to the 10% of Walgreens-only patients:

“[O]ut of those 10% people that were exclusively using Walgreens, about 3% of them actually ended up calling into the Express Scripts Call Center. The rest of them were able to manage through the www.expressscripts.com website, or could just literally drive across the street in some cases and find another pharmacy. And out of those 3% that did have to call in and find additional support, half of them were able to get through our automated voice response system and get their questions answered that way and didn’t even need to speak to a live agent. The other half did have to speak to a live agent and that live agent was able to give them the necessary tools and information to find an additional pharmacy close by that was convenient for them.”

Given these data, it’s no surprise that Walgreens never released any data on recaptured prescriptions. I estimate that Walgreens ultimately regained only about half of the prescriptions from its Express Scripts dispute.

2 comments:

As a former Walgreens Pharmacy Manager, I can state that in my local area, the recapture rate for the ESI debacle was somewhere around 30-35%. In other areas with tougher competition, the figure was even worse. Overall, on the National stage, the figure might close in on 50%, but that is rather optimistic in my opinion... The long-term damage to growth figures in many geographic areas could be considered catastrophic since Walgreens is considering store closings in New England.

DISCLAIMERThe analyses on this website are based on information and data that are in the public domain. Any conclusions, findings, opinions, or recommendations are based on our own experienced and professional judgment and interpretations given the information available. While all information is believed to be reliable at the time of writing, the information provided here is for reference use only and does not constitute the rendering of legal, financial, commercial, or other professional advice by Pembroke Consulting, Inc., Drug Channels Institute, or the author. Any reliance upon the information is at your own risk, and Pembroke Consulting, Inc., Drug Channels Institute, and the author shall not be responsible for any liability arising from or related to the use or accuracy of the information in any way. Pembroke Consulting, Inc., and Drug Channels Institute do not make investment recommendations, on this website or otherwise. Nothing on this website should be interpreted as an opinion by Pembroke Consulting, Inc., Drug Channels Institute, or the author on the investment prospects of specific companies.

The comments contained on this site come from members of the public and do not necessarily reflect the views of Drug Channels Institute or the author. Neither Drug Channels Institute nor the author endorse or approve of their content. Drug Channels Institute and the author reserve the right to remove or block comments, but are under no obligation to explain individual moderation decisions.

The public domain use of our materials includes linking to our website. You do not need to obtain special permission to link to the Drug Channels site. The material on this site is protected by copyright law. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this material may result in severe civil and criminal penalties and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent of the law. This report may be cited in commercial documents with full and appropriate attribution. We do not intend to reduce, limit, or restrict any rights arising from fair use under copyright law or other applicable laws. We do not permit our articles to be republished without prior written permission.

The content of Sponsored Posts does not necessarily reflect the views of Pembroke Consulting, Inc., Drug Channels Institute, or any of its employees.